Last-Minute Push Aims to Delay Medicaid DSH Cuts

Rich Daly, HFMA senior writer/editor

A former Medicaid leader doubts another delay has much chance of passing Congress.

Sept. 7—Slated to have billions of dollars in Medicaid uncompensated-care federal funding cut in less than a month, hospitals are aiming for a last-minute reprieve.

The long-delayed cuts in Medicaid disproportionate share hospital (DSH) funding will begin Oct. 1 and total $2 billion in FY18. The previous delays have increased the size of the Medicaid DSH cuts required by the Affordable Care Act (ACA) from $17 billion to $43 billion. The cuts originally
were slated to begin in FY14 but have been delayed twice, and now they are scheduled to occur from FY18 through FY25.

In FY15, $11.9 billion in federal funding was allotted to states for DSH payments, and of that amount states spent a total of $10.6 billion, according to a
report by the Medicaid and CHIP Payment and Access Commission (MACPAC).

Now hospitals are hoping for another reprieve from the cuts, which could be especially worrisome for safety-net hospitals.

“One big plan that hospitals are pushing is to get Congress to delay or eliminate the cuts altogether,” said Barbara Eyman, principal at Eyman Associates. “A lot of hospitals are working hard on that front.”

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) issued a
proposed rule in July to specify the formula for dividing the cuts among states. Then it will be up to states to determine how to divide the cuts among their hospitals.

The CMS methodology would implement the largest cuts, by dollar amount, in New York ($329 million), New Jersey ($154 million), and California ($153 million). As a share of each state’s DSH funding, the largest cuts would occur in Massachusetts (31 percent), Vermont (28 percent), and Washington,
D.C. (25 percent), according to the rule.

“This is making it pretty real, for hospitals to see those numbers in black and white,” Eyman said.

The CMS-proposed allocations give relatively more weight to the number of uninsured individuals in a state, according to a Manatt
analysis.

“This should favor states that did not expand Medicaid under the ACA and consequentially have higher rates of uninsurance,” the analysis stated.

Cindy Mann, director of the Center for Medicaid and CHIP Services under President Barack Obama, agreed that the cuts will fall harder on hospitals in states that expanded Medicaid eligibility.

“For many of the hospitals that serve a large number of both Medicaid and uninsured individuals, it will have a pretty significant effect,” Mann said in an interview.

Among the changes brought by the repeated delays was an acceleration of the cuts. The first year of cuts originally was slated to total $500 million as opposed to $2 billion.

“It doesn’t just affect Medicaid and uninsured people, it affects hospitals,” said Mann, now a partner at Manatt. “So it will affect their ability to serve a broader community of patients.”

The DSH reductions were intended as an offset to the cost of coverage expansions under the ACA after that legislation cut the number of uninsured, who hospitals are required by federal law to treat regardless of compensation. Total hospital uncompensated care for Medicaid beneficiaries and uninsured
patients fell by about $4.6 billion (9.3 percent) between 2013 and 2014, and the largest declines occurred in expansion states, according to MACPAC.

But critics of the DSH cuts point out that 19 states did not expand Medicaid eligibility, and the full extent of expected cost reductions has not materialized.

According to MACPAC, the FY18 DSH cut in 20 states is projected to be larger than the decline in hospital uncompensated care from 2013 to 2014 (the last year for which data are available).

“So there’s a real need for the DSH dollars,” Eyman said.

Lobbying to Avoid
Cuts

Hospitals are looking to include a delay of the Medicaid DSH cuts in a must-pass reauthorization of the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP).

“That would make a whole lot of sense,” Eyman said, noting that the previous delay in implementation of the cuts also was paired with a CHIP extension as part of the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015.

The American Hospital Association (AHA) urged in an Aug. 23
letter that either Congress repeal the DSH cuts or CMS delay implementation past FY18 “due to our significant concerns with the underlying data CMS proposes to use in the DSH Health Reform Methodology (DHRM).”

AHA said a lack of transparency in the formula used to divvy the cuts among the states hampers the ability of state governments and stakeholders to assess how the formula will affect state DSH allotments, particularly heading into FY18.

The delay should last until the underlying data can be evaluated and made public, AHA said.

“I agree with the points that AHA raises about the transparency and the quality of the data, or lack thereof, but really Congress is the one that should be stepping in at this point,” Eyman said.

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) the ranking member on the Senate Finance Committee, which has lead jurisdiction on Medicaid, was noncommittal when asked Thursday about the prospect of including a delay in upcoming CHIP funding legislation.

A spokesman for the Federation of American Hospitals said he was unaware of a specific legislative package that would delay the cuts, but his organization remained “hopeful” that a delay would happen.

America’s Essential Hospitals, which represents safety-net hospitals, sent a Sept. 5 letter to congressional leaders—cosigned by 75 other patient and provider groups—that warned its members’ average operating margins would drop to -3.6 percent without Medicaid DSH funding.

“We urge Congress to continue the delay of DSH cuts until a more sustainable solution is reached,” the groups wrote.

Similarly, Karen Fisher, JD, chief public policy officer for the Association of American Medical Colleges, said in a written statement that her organization plans to push Congress to delay the DSH cuts and any other CHIP or year-end legislation.

“If these cuts were put in place, this will cause hardship for many Medicaid beneficiaries and the hospitals that provide care for them," Fisher wrote.

However, Mann was doubtful Congress would avert the cut again.

“I have not picked up that there is significant momentum for a further delay,” Mann said. “It’s happened twice before when it was supposed to go into effect, but it does not seem to be in the conversation at this point.”

Responding to Cuts

The hospitals most vulnerable to the cuts include safety-net hospitals and teaching hospitals, according to Mann.

Hospitals that may face DSH cuts need to work hard to find dollar-for-dollar offsets, Eyman said, especially safety-net hospitals with margins that “are at or near or below the break-even point.”

Categories of savings that hospitals are exploring include reductions in service hours in clinics, staff cuts, and reductions in investments in new equipment, Eyman said.

“Certainly we’ve seen hospitals closing, and particularly we’ve been seeing that in rural areas,” Mann said. “Depending on the patient mix of the hospital and the state of the hospital, it could be a very significant additional hit on their bottom line.”

A former Medicaid leader doubts another delay has much chance of passing Congress.

Sept. 7—Slated to have billions of dollars in Medicaid uncompensated-care federal funding cut in less than a month, hospitals are aiming for a last-minute reprieve.

The long-delayed cuts in Medicaid disproportionate share hospital (DSH) funding will begin Oct. 1 and total $2 billion in FY18. The previous delays have increased the size of the Medicaid DSH cuts required by the Affordable Care Act (ACA) from $17 billion to $43 billion. The cuts originally
were slated to begin in FY14 but have been delayed twice, and now they are scheduled to occur from FY18 through FY25.

In FY15, $11.9 billion in federal funding was allotted to states for DSH payments, and of that amount states spent a total of $10.6 billion, according to a
report by the Medicaid and CHIP Payment and Access Commission (MACPAC).

Now hospitals are hoping for another reprieve from the cuts, which could be especially worrisome for safety-net hospitals.

“One big plan that hospitals are pushing is to get Congress to delay or eliminate the cuts altogether,” said Barbara Eyman, principal at Eyman Associates. “A lot of hospitals are working hard on that front.”

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) issued a
proposed rule in July to specify the formula for dividing the cuts among states. Then it will be up to states to determine how to divide the cuts among their hospitals.

The CMS methodology would implement the largest cuts, by dollar amount, in New York ($329 million), New Jersey ($154 million), and California ($153 million). As a share of each state’s DSH funding, the largest cuts would occur in Massachusetts (31 percent), Vermont (28 percent), and Washington,
D.C. (25 percent), according to the rule.

“This is making it pretty real, for hospitals to see those numbers in black and white,” Eyman said.

The CMS-proposed allocations give relatively more weight to the number of uninsured individuals in a state, according to a Manatt
analysis.

“This should favor states that did not expand Medicaid under the ACA and consequentially have higher rates of uninsurance,” the analysis stated.

Cindy Mann, director of the Center for Medicaid and CHIP Services under President Barack Obama, agreed that the cuts will fall harder on hospitals in states that expanded Medicaid eligibility.

“For many of the hospitals that serve a large number of both Medicaid and uninsured individuals, it will have a pretty significant effect,” Mann said in an interview.

Among the changes brought by the repeated delays was an acceleration of the cuts. The first year of cuts originally was slated to total $500 million as opposed to $2 billion.

“It doesn’t just affect Medicaid and uninsured people, it affects hospitals,” said Mann, now a partner at Manatt. “So it will affect their ability to serve a broader community of patients.”

The DSH reductions were intended as an offset to the cost of coverage expansions under the ACA after that legislation cut the number of uninsured, who hospitals are required by federal law to treat regardless of compensation. Total hospital uncompensated care for Medicaid beneficiaries and uninsured
patients fell by about $4.6 billion (9.3 percent) between 2013 and 2014, and the largest declines occurred in expansion states, according to MACPAC.

But critics of the DSH cuts point out that 19 states did not expand Medicaid eligibility, and the full extent of expected cost reductions has not materialized.

According to MACPAC, the FY18 DSH cut in 20 states is projected to be larger than the decline in hospital uncompensated care from 2013 to 2014 (the last year for which data are available).

“So there’s a real need for the DSH dollars,” Eyman said.

Lobbying to Avoid
Cuts

Hospitals are looking to include a delay of the Medicaid DSH cuts in a must-pass reauthorization of the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP).

“That would make a whole lot of sense,” Eyman said, noting that the previous delay in implementation of the cuts also was paired with a CHIP extension as part of the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015.

The American Hospital Association (AHA) urged in an Aug. 23
letter that either Congress repeal the DSH cuts or CMS delay implementation past FY18 “due to our significant concerns with the underlying data CMS proposes to use in the DSH Health Reform Methodology (DHRM).”

AHA said a lack of transparency in the formula used to divvy the cuts among the states hampers the ability of state governments and stakeholders to assess how the formula will affect state DSH allotments, particularly heading into FY18.

The delay should last until the underlying data can be evaluated and made public, AHA said.

“I agree with the points that AHA raises about the transparency and the quality of the data, or lack thereof, but really Congress is the one that should be stepping in at this point,” Eyman said.

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) the ranking member on the Senate Finance Committee, which has lead jurisdiction on Medicaid, was noncommittal when asked Thursday about the prospect of including a delay in upcoming CHIP funding legislation.

A spokesman for the Federation of American Hospitals said he was unaware of a specific legislative package that would delay the cuts, but his organization remained “hopeful” that a delay would happen.

America’s Essential Hospitals, which represents safety-net hospitals, sent a Sept. 5 letter to congressional leaders—cosigned by 75 other patient and provider groups—that warned its members’ average operating margins would drop to -3.6 percent without Medicaid DSH funding.

“We urge Congress to continue the delay of DSH cuts until a more sustainable solution is reached,” the groups wrote.

Similarly, Karen Fisher, JD, chief public policy officer for the Association of American Medical Colleges, said in a written statement that her organization plans to push Congress to delay the DSH cuts and any other CHIP or year-end legislation.

“If these cuts were put in place, this will cause hardship for many Medicaid beneficiaries and the hospitals that provide care for them," Fisher wrote.

However, Mann was doubtful Congress would avert the cut again.

“I have not picked up that there is significant momentum for a further delay,” Mann said. “It’s happened twice before when it was supposed to go into effect, but it does not seem to be in the conversation at this point.”

Responding to Cuts

The hospitals most vulnerable to the cuts include safety-net hospitals and teaching hospitals, according to Mann.

Hospitals that may face DSH cuts need to work hard to find dollar-for-dollar offsets, Eyman said, especially safety-net hospitals with margins that “are at or near or below the break-even point.”

Categories of savings that hospitals are exploring include reductions in service hours in clinics, staff cuts, and reductions in investments in new equipment, Eyman said.

“Certainly we’ve seen hospitals closing, and particularly we’ve been seeing that in rural areas,” Mann said. “Depending on the patient mix of the hospital and the state of the hospital, it could be a very significant additional hit on their bottom line.”

HFMA RESOURCE LIBRARY

Patient financial engagement is more challenging than ever – and more critical. With patient responsibility as a percentage of revenue on the rise, providers have seen their billing-related costs and accounts receivable levels increase. If increasing collection yield and reducing costs are a priority for your organization, the metrics outlined in this presentation will provide the framework you need to understand what’s working and what’s not, in order to guide your overall patient financial engagement initiatives and optimize results.

No two patients are the same. Each has a very personal healthcare experience, and each has distinct financial needs and preferences that have an impact on how, when and if they chose to pay their healthcare bill. It’s no longer effective to apply static billing techniques to solve the complex challenge of collecting balances from patients. The need to tailor financial conversations and payment options to individual needs and preferences is critical. This presentation provides 10 recommendations that will not only help you improve payment performance through a more tailored approach, but take control of rising collection costs.

This white paper, written by Apex Vice President of Solutions and Services, Carrie Romandine, discusses the importance of patient segmentation and messaging specifically related to the patient revenue cycle. Applying strategic messaging that is tailored to each patient type will not only better educate consumers on payment options specific to their billing needs, but it will maximize the amount collected before sending to collections. Further, targeted messaging should be applied across all points of patient interaction (i.e. point of service, customer service, patient statements) and analyzed regularly for maximized results.

This white paper, written by Apex President Patrick Maurer, discusses methods to increase patient adoption of online payments. Providers are now seeking ways to incrementally collect more payments due from patients as well as speeding up the rate of collections. This white paper shows why patient-centric approaches to online payment portals are important complements to traditional provider-centric approaches.

Increased electronic engagement between healthcare providers and patients provides significant opportunities for improving revenue cycle metrics and encouraging patients to access EHRs. This article, written by Apex Founder and CEO Brian Kueppers, explores a number of strategies to create synergy between patient billing, online payment portals and electronic health record (EHR) software to realize a high ROI in speed to payment, patient satisfaction and portal adoption for meaningful use.

Faced with a rising tide of bad debt, a large Southeastern healthcare system was seeing a sharp decline in net patient revenues. The need to improve collections was dire. By integrating critical tools and processes, the health system was able to increase online payments and improve its financial position. Taking a holistic approach increased overall collection yield by 10% while costs came down because the number of statements sent to patients fell by 10%, which equated to a $1.3M annualized improvement in patient cash over a six-month period. This case study explains how.

To maintain fiscal fitness and boost patient satisfaction and loyalty, healthcare providers need visibility into when and how much they will be paid–by whom–and the ability to better navigate obstacles to payment. They need payment clarity. This whitepaper illuminates this concept that is winning fans at forward-thinking hospitals.

Financial services staff are always looking for ways to improve the verification, billing and collections processes, and Munson Healthcare is no different. Read about how they streamlined the billing process to produce cleaner bills on the front end and helped financial services staff collect more than $1 million in additional upfront annual revenue in one year.

Effective revenue cycle management can be a challenge for any hospital, but for smaller providers it is even tougher. Read how Wallace Thomson identified unreimbursed procedures, streamlined claims management, and improved its ability to determine charity eligibility.

Before launching an energy-efficiency initiative, it’s important to build a solid business case and understand the funding options and potential incentives that are available. Healthcare leaders should consider taking the steps outlined in the whitepaper to ease the process of gaining approval, piloting, implementing, and supporting sustainability projects. You will find that investing in sustainability and energy efficiency helps hospitals add cash to their bottom line. Discover how hospitals and health systems have various options for funding energy-efficient and renewable-energy initiatives, depending on their current financial structure and strategy.

Health care is a dynamic mergers and acquisitions market with numerous hospitals and health systems contemplating or pursuing formal arrangements with other entities. These relationships often pose a strategic benefit, such as enhancing competencies across the continuum, facilitating economies of scale, or giving the participants a competitive advantage in a crowded market. Underpinning any profitable acquisition is a robust capital planning strategy that ensures an organization reserves sufficient funds and efficiently onboards partners that advance the enterprise mission and values.

The success of healthcare mergers, acquisitions, and other affiliations is predicated in part on available capital, and the need for and sources of funding are considerations present throughout the partnering process, from choosing a partner to evaluating an arrangement’s capital needs to selecting an integration model to finding the right money source to finance the deal. This whitepaper offers several strategies that health system leaders have used to assess and manage capital needs for their growing networks.

Announcements from several commercial payers and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) early in 2015 around increased efforts to form value-based contracts with providers seemed to point to an impending rise in risk-based contracting. Rather than wait for disruption from the outside in, health care providers are now making inroads on collaborating with payers on various risk-based contracting models to increase the value of health care from within.

Yuma Regional Medical Center (YRMC) is a not-for-profit hospital serving a population of roughly 200,000 in Yuma and the surrounding communities.
Before becoming a ZirMed client, Yuma was attempting to manually monitor hundreds of thousands of charges which led to significant charge capture leakage. Learn how Yuma & ZirMed worked together to address underlying collections issues at the front end, thus increasing Yuma’s overall bottom line.

Kindred Hospital Rehabilitation Services works with partners to audit the market and the facility’s role in that market to identify opportunities for improvement. This approach leads to successes; Kindred’s clinical rehab and management expertise complements our partners’ strengths. Every facility and challenge is unique, and requires a full objective analysis.

Qualified coders are getting harder to come by, and even the most seasoned professional can struggle with the complexity of ICD-10. This 5-Minute White Paper Briefing explains how partnerships can help improve coding and other key RCM operations potentially at a cost savings.

The point of managing your revenue cycle isn’t just to improve revenue and cash flow. It’s to do those things effectively by consistently following best practices— while spending as little time, money, and energy on them as possible.

The reasons claims are denied are so varied that managing denials can feel like chasing a thousand different tails. This situation is not surprising given that a hypothetical denial rate of just 5 percent translates to tens of thousands of denied claims per year for large hospitals—where real‐world denial rates often range from 12 to 22 percent. Read about how predictive modeling can detect meaningful correlations across claims denials data.

Emergency Mobile Health Care (EMHC) was founded to be and remains an exclusively locally owned and operated emergency medical service organization; today EMHC serves a population of more than a million people in and around Memphis, answering 75,000 calls each year.

Since the Physician Quality Reporting Initiative (PQRI) introduction, CMS has paid more than $100 million in bonus payments to participants. However, these bonuses ended in 2015; providers who successfully meet the reporting requirements in 2016 will avoid the 2% negative payment adjustment in 2018, so now is the time to act! Included in this whitepaper are implications of increasing patient responsibility, collections best practices, and collections and internal control solutions.

Getting paid what your physician deserves—that’s the goal of every biller. Yet even for the best billers, achieving that success can be elusive when denials stand in the way of success, presenting challenges at every turn. Denials aren’t going away, but you can learn techniques to manage and even prevent them.Join practice management expert Elizabeth W. Woodcock, MBA, FACMPE, CPC, to: Discover methods to translate denial data into business intelligence to improve your bottom line, determine staff productivity benchmarks for billers, and recognize common mistakes in denial management.

Read more about factors contributing to the changes in the post-acute marketplace and what it means for manufacturers, physicians, clinicians, patients, and post-acute facilities as they anticipate the transition to the second curve.

HSG helped the physicians and executives of St. Claire Regional in Morehead, Kentucky, define their shared vision for how the group would evolve over the next decade. As well as, develop the strategic and operational priorities which refocused and accelerated the group’s evolution.

The client was a nine-hospital health system with 14 clinics serving communities in a multi-state market with very limited access to care, poor economic conditions, high unemployment, and a heavy Medicare/Medicaid/uninsured payer mix. In most of these communities, the system was the sole source of care.
Though the clinics were of substantial size (they employed 98 physicians) and comprised of multiple specialists, the physicians functioned as individuals and the practices lacked any real group culture.

Clinical integration can be expensive, but it doesn’t have to be, as this four-step road map for developing a CIN proves. Does it have to cost millions to initiate a clinical integration strategy?
Contrary to popular belief, we have clients who have generated substantial shared savings and a significant ROI over time, without massive investments. Yes, some financial capital is required for resources the CIN providers can’t bring to the table themselves. But the size of that investment can be miniscule relative to the value it produces: improved outcomes and documentation for payers.

Today’s concerns about physician compensation are the result of the changing healthcare environment. The transition to value is slow, but finally becoming a reality. Proactive hospitals want to ensure that provider incentives are properly aligned with ever-increasing value-based demands.
This report focuses on the three big questions HSG receives about adding value to physician compensation; Why are organizations redesigning their provider compensation plans? What elements and parameters must be part of successful compensation plans? How are organizations implementing compensation changes?

Revenue Cycle Management has become an even more complex issue with declining reimbursements, implementation of Electronic Health Records, evolving local carrier determinations (LCD), and payer credentialing [The emphasis on healthcare fraud, abuse and compliance has increased the importance of accuracy of data reporting and claims filing).
The efficiency of a medical practice’s billing operations has critical impact on the financial performance. In many cases, patient billings are the primary revenue source that pays staff salaries, provider compensation and overhead operating cost. Inefficiencies or inaccurate billing will contribute to operating losses.

This publication identifies and outlines the necessary characteristics of a fully-functioning clinically integrated network (CIN). What it doesn’t do is detail how hospitals and providers can participate in the value-based care environment during the development process.
One common misconception is that the CIN can’t do anything significant until it has obtained the FTC’s “clinically integrated” stamp of approval. While the network must satisfy the FTC’s definition of clinical integration before single signature contracting for FFS rates and contracts can legally start, hospitals and providers can enjoy three key benefits during the development process.

Nearly half of all Medicare beneficiaries treated in the hospital will need post-acute care services after discharge. For these patients, a stay in an inpatient rehabilitation facility, skilled nursing facility or other post-acute care setting comes between hospital and home.

With the proper process, tools, and feedback mechanisms in place, budgeting can be a valuable exercise for organizations while helping hold organizational leaders accountable. Having a proper monthly variance review process is one of the most critical factors in creating a more efficient and accurate budget. Monthly variance reporting puts parameters around what is to be expected during the upcoming budget entry process.

Managing the cost of patient care is the top strategic priority of most hospital CFOs today. As healthcare shifts to more data-driven decision making, having clear visibility into key volume, cost and profitability measures across clinical service lines is becoming increasingly important for both long-range and tactical planning activities. In turn, the cost accounting function in healthcare provider organizations is becoming an increasingly important and strategic function. This whitepaper includes five strategies for efficient and accurate cost accounting and service line analytics and keys to overcoming the associated challenges.